On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 04:00:33PM -0700, David VomLehn wrote:> Parag Warudkar wrote:>> On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 5:04 PM, Linus Torvalds>> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:>>>>> And embedded people (the ones that might care about 1% code size) are the>>> ones that would also want smaller stacks even more!>>>> This is something I never understood - embedded devices are not going>> to run more than a few processes and 4K*(Few Processes)>> IMHO is not worth a saving now a days even in embedded world given>> falling memory prices. Or do I misunderstand?>> Embedded applications span a huge range of sizes, from the very small > devices to which you refer, to quite complex devices. The cable settop > boxes we develop have over a hundred interrupt sources, typically run > 250-300 threads, and have 192+ MiB of memory. For all that, we are very > cost sensitive and are under constant pressure to come up with reliable > ways to save memory.

As you say correctly the term "embedded" gets used for many different devices.

And if you have 192+ MiB of memory you have so much that all these kernel size discussions don't really matter.

> David VomLehn

cuAdrian

--

"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed